U.S. to Throw More Money at Central America’s Drug War

Posted on Jun 25, 2011

At a regional conference this week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged almost $300 million to the governments of Central America during 2011 to aid in their efforts to oppose cartels and others involved in the region’s violent, illegal drug trade. The new assistance package is almost a 15 percent increase from last year’s aid. Neither Clinton nor the article below offered details on exactly how the money should or would be used, but it seems safe to assume most will be spent on police and military operations. —ARK

BBC:

Announcing the increased US funding, Mrs Clinton said Washington was committed to helping the region.

“Everyone knows the statistics, the murder rates surpassing civil war levels,” she said in remarks to the Central American Security Conference (SICA).

Mrs Clinton said funding to tackle transnational organised crime in the region would be increased from $260m in 2010 to almost $300m this year.

felicity, FYI, the Rube Goldberg scheme of the U.S. Treasury creates interest bearing bonds to buy money printed by the Federal Reserve, which is owned by private banks. This assures the banksters income from the Treasury bonds they hold. If, instead, the Government were to print up the money this Rube Goldberg scheme would be eliminated and $100’s of billion saved by depriving the banks the interest. Doing it Rube Goldberg style creates transactions for which the banks charge money. The banks make $billions transferring, money laundering, of drug cartel money and other monies to avoid being taxed.

The current reality of a broken “two party system” was driven home by the fact that the supposed peace preferring Democrat Party offered as its top candidates the war and violence mongers Obama and Hillary, in the face of an electorate that consistently polls against their wars in spite of a collaborating MIC media.

I need to get may ass in gear to get out the Democrat Party and into a socially responsible alternative, even if it is “unrealistic” in Amerika.

TDoff - “...borrowed money” caught my attention and
left me wondering why the US has to take on the debt
incurred by borrowing money to give to another country
when that country should/could just borrow the money
directly and leave us out of the mix.

There’s got to be some bankers some where in this fetid
wood pile who will make mega bucks from Clinton’s
latest (liberal) lark.